Everything up to this point has been minor tweaks of the old EABA system. Now for some new stuff. The EABA v2 combat system is superficially familiar and uses rules in the same way, but combat time is radically different, not just from EABA v1, but from any other rpg as far as I can tell. It finally lets you run a fight in a way that matches not just the real world, but the dramatic interpretation of combat you see in the movies.

It is a draft, so I expect some bugs and hiccups. That's why you are here. However, the v2 system does work as advertised, so do not expect fundamental changes to it.

Edit: July 29 2011

This reflects changes and suggestions on the rules, and pending major fubars is more or less the final form.

Well.

I'll.

Be.

Dipped.

In.

Chocolate.

I'm ... surprised ... the 1 second combat turn was always my bugbear with EABA, for reasons I've detailed elsewhere.

And here you've, effectively, done away with it ...

And done it in a way that makes it reflect something like I've always tried to work into things (inaction time in combat) in a way that, on the first read through, looks like it will work ... and work great!!!

What impresses me even more is the 10 turn limit! And the rationale behind it.

I was just joking with some friends this afternoon, friends who play HERO System (which I admire in some ways, the system that is, but find tedious in the extreme for the excessive length of combat resolution) about how it takes hours to replay a few seconds of combat.

And you have, as far as I can tell, a workable system that ensures that Combat will be limited by factors such as occur, well, in real life!

I'm not entirely certain, though, that I like the idea of bidding for Initiative (I am a bit worried it might impede the flow of what should otherwise be a much smoother and quicker combat system) ... but, as far as I can tell from a thought exercise running it through in my head, it should work well enough within the context of a limited number of Combat Rounds ... I'll reserve judgement for the moment until I get a chance to run it through with some friends, and that won't be till next Saturday at the earliest and see how it works in practise.

(But since you're not gonna change it anyway ... )

Colour me impressed.

(However, I think there are a significant number of people who will, until they can be convinced to try it, that is, either hate it or have severe reservations ... it's too ... too ... different ... just like, oh, TimeLords, CORPS and, oh, EABA V1.1 ...)



Armour and Damage rules seem OK, but it's 12:30 and I should be catching some zzzzz's ... more tomorrow sometime.

Phil

Well, when you change things up, you don't play around.

I really, really like the 10 round combat sequence. It reads very well, though I think it might be hard for people to get their heads fully around.

I am not as keen on the initiative bid system. It looks like it should work well around a table, but as a gamer who is almost exclusively online, or playing by post, I'd have to figure some kind of workaround.

It seems that if you are playing online, if you have an instant messaging window open in addition to a chat window, that people can just IM you their initiative bids. That way you know all of them, and they do not know anyone's except their own until you reveal them. By email would be the same way.

The "advanced combat" chapter has the entire lobby scene from the Matrix from start to finish as its combat example. It's the sort of exhaustive example that uses just about every rule in the book, and also demonstrates that the system works.

Actually, that's an interesting idea for Initiative in PBEM games ... I can see that it would actually work better for them than for real life, face to face, games in some ways. Now, if I a) weren't such a technophobe re mobile phones (work of the devil, I say ) and b) where we play wasn't so noisy/crowded we might even try to implement it in a face to face test

Can't wait to see the Advanced Chapter and the Matrix example worked through.

Actually, one thing that occurred to me last night as I was falling asleep - the increasing turn length should work fine on a human to human level of combat ... or on a vehicle to vehicle level, for that matter ... but it seems, on a first think through, that it may not mix people vs vehicles well because of the speed/movement differential.

Do you have specific rules to cover this, or has it worked well when you tried such (assuming you have?)?

Phil

I can't help shuddering whenever "the matrix" is used as an example for the new combat system. Not a fan, but I found agent smith to be the most believable representation of a true AI and how it might "feel' towards humanity I'd ever seen. In fact I was nodding to myself as agent smith described his feelings towards humanity.

As to the new combat rules, I may use them in larger battles. In cases where it's more like "Kill the guard quietly before he can raise an alarm" and it's likely to last <10 seconds I may use the old one.

Vehicles & people: Remember that the v2 turn scaling does not change the relationship between the two from the old system, or from reality for that matter. A vehicle will have a certain movement level, and the driver would choose to use some or all of the turn mod to determine how hard they are mashing the accelerator.

It's always going to be hard in terms of gamer mechanics to deal with something like a vehicle moving from far away to right on top of you in the course of a single turn.

There will be notes in the vehicles section about fitting vehicles into the initiative and turn structure. Generally, vehicles will have lousy Initiative, so people can go first and "hold action" to wait to interact until the person feels the time is right.

On reading the replies, I agree the new initative system could be made to work, with players who are willing to learn the system. If they are rule-averse, then they are probably the wrong group for EABA anyhow, since for all its excellent points, it does take a bit of an adjustment in mindset for many who come from say, a DnD background.

As far as switching back and forth between old and new systems, it seems to me that using Death's example, if its one guard you are taking out, and assuming your character(s) are built to competently deal out violence in the first place, with an appropriate level of stealth, that dealing out a single guard should not take more then one, or at most two rounds, in the first place.

And if it all goes pear-shaped, and the guard manages to call in the cavalry, then you've either got a new fight starting when the first responders show up, and ending when the truly crushing numbers of reinforcements appear, or its time to beat feet madly away, and leave the guard right where you found him, because clearly this isn't your day.

Judge Death wrote:


Actually, you're right. I can see situations where it may make sense to use a slower progression through the ten "levels" rather than a straight one phase is always longer than the last progression as it stands ...

But the 1 second turns will probably be limited to first actions and/or surprise turns ... at least, that's what I think at the moment, but I won't be able to try a valid test until next weekend.

Phil

admin wrote:


Excellent, that's more or less what I was hoping for, and for the initiative - presumably better initiative for vehicles not "buttoned up" and with the track commander exposed?

And really lousy initiative otherwise?

Phil